Authors:
Ernő Zalai Corvinus University of Budapest, Budapest, Hungary

Search for other papers by Ernő Zalai in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
and
Tamás Révész Corvinus University of Budapest, Budapest, Hungary

Search for other papers by Tamás Révész in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
Restricted access

Léon Walras (1874) had already realised that his neo-classical general equilibrium model could not accommodate autonomous investments. In the early 1960s, Amartya Sen analysed the same issue in a simple, one-sector macroeconomic model of a closed economy. He showed that fixing investment in the model, built strictly on neo-classical assumptions, would make the system overdetermined, and thus one should loosen some neo-classical conditions of competitive equilibrium. He analysed three not neo-classical “closure options”, which could make the model well-determined in the case of fixed investment. His list was later extended by others and it was shown that the closure dilemma arises in the more complex computable general equilibrium (CGE) models as well, as does the choice of adjustment mechanism assumed to bring about equilibrium at the macro level. It was also illustrated through several numerical models that the adopted closure rule can significantly affect the results of policy simulations based on a CGE model.

Despite these warnings, the issue of macro closure is often neglected in policy simulations. It is, therefore, worth revisiting the issue and demonstrating by further examples its importance, as well as pointing out that the closure problem in the CGE models extends well beyond the problem of how to incorporate autonomous investments into a CGE model. Several closure rules are discussed in this paper and their diverse outcomes are illustrated by numerical models calibrated on statistical data. First, the analyses are done in a one-sector model, similar to Sen’s, but extended into a model of an open economy. Next, the same analyses are repeated using a fully-fledged multi-sectoral CGE model, calibrated on the same statistical data. Comparing the results obtained by the two models it is shown that although they generate quite similar results in terms of the direction and — to a somewhat lesser extent — of the magnitude of change in the main macro variables using the same closure option, the predictions of the multi-sectoral CGE model are clearly more realistic and balanced.

  • Bergman, L.Jorgenson, D.Zalai, E. (eds) (1990): General Equilibrium Modeling and Economic Policy Analysis. New York: Basil Blackwell.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Decaluwe, M.Martens, A.Monette, M. (1988): Macro Closures in Open Economy CGE Models: A Numerical Reappraisal. International Journal of Development Planning Literature, 3(2): 6990.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Dervis, K.de Melo, J.Robinson, S. (1982): General Equilibrium Models for Development Policy. Cambridge: University Press.

  • Devarajan, Sh.Go, D. S.Lewis, J. D.Robinson, Sh.Sinko, P. (1994): Policy Lessons from a Simple Open-Economy Model. Policy Research Working Paper Series 1375, The World Bank.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Dewatripont, M.Michel, G. (1987): On Closure Rules, Homogeneity and Dynamics in Applied General Equilibrium Models. Journal of Development Economics, 26(1): 6576.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Hertel, T. W. (ed.) (1997): Global Trade Analysis: Modelling and Applications. Cambridge: University Press.

  • Hungarian Central Statistical Office (2012): National Accounts 2009–2011. Budapest.

  • Hungarian Central Statistical Office (2012): Dissemination Database. Symmetric Input-Output Tables, Supply and Use Tables. Budapest.

  • Johansen, L. (1960): A Multi-Sectoral Study of Economic Growth. Amsterdam: North-Holland.

  • Kaldor, N. (1956): Alternative Theories of Distribution. Review of Economic Studies, 23: 94100.

  • Keynes, J. (1936): The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

  • Limão, N. (2008): Optimal Tariffs. In: Durlauf, S. N.Blume, L. E. (eds): The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Pasinetti, P. (1962): Rate of Profit and Income Distribution in Relation to the Rate of Economic Growth. Review of Economic Studies, 29: 267279.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Rattsø, J. (1982): Different Macro Closures of the Original Johansen Model and Their Impact on Policy Evaluation. Journal of Policy Modeling, 4(1): 8597.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Robinson, S. (1991): Macroeconomics, Financial Variables, and Computable General Equilibrium Models. World Development, 19(11): 15091525.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Robinson, S. (2006): Macro Models and Multipliers: Leontief, Stone, Keynes, and CGE Models. In: Janvry de, A.Kanbur, R. (eds): Poverty, Inequality and Development: Essays in Honour of Erik Thorbecke. Springer.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Sen, A. (1963): Neo-Classical and Neo-Keynesian Theories of Distribution. Economic Record, 39: 5364.

  • Shoven, J. B.Whalley, J. (1992): Applying General Equilibrium. Cambridge: University Press.

  • Stone, R. (1954): Linear Expenditure Systems and Demand Analysis: An Application to the Pattern of British Demand. The Economic Journal, 64(255): 511527.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Taylor, L. (1990): Structuralist CGE models. In: Taylor, E. (ed.): Socially Relevant Policy Analysis. Cambridge, Mass., U.S.A.: MIT Press.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Taylor, L.Lysy, F. J. (1979): Vanishing Income Redistributions: Keynesian Clues about Model Surprises in the Short Run. Journal of Development Economics, 6: 1129.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Thissen, M. (1998): A Classification of Empirical CGE Modelling. SOM Research Report, 99C01. University of Groningen, The Netherlands.

  • Tobin, J. (1971): Essays in Economics: Macroeconomics. Chicago: Markham Publishing.

  • Zalai, E. (2004): The von Neumann Model and the Early Models of General Equilibrium. Acta Oeconomica, 54(1): 338.

  • Walras, L. (1874): Élements d’économie politique pure; ou théorie de la richesse sociale. Paris.

  • Collapse
  • Expand
Submit Your Manuscript
 
The author instruction is available in PDF.
Please, download the file from HERE.

 

The description of the refereeing procedure is available in PDF.
Please, download the file from HERE.

 

 

Senior editors

Editor(s)-in-Chief: Prof. Dr. Mihályi, Péter

Editor(s): Ványai, Judit

Editorial Board

  • Ádám Török (Chairman) / University of Pannonia; Budapest University of Technology and Economics
  • Edina Berlinger / Corvinus University of Budapest, Department of Finance
  • Beáta Farkas / Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, University of Szeged
  • Péter Halmai / Budapest University of Technology and Economics; National University of Public Service
  • István Kónya / Institute of Economics Centre for Regional and Economic Studies, University of Pécs
  • János Köllő / Institute of Economics Centre for Regional and Economic Studies
  • István Magas / Corvinus University of Budapest, Department of World Economy; University of Physical Education, Department. of Sports and Decision Sciences
 

Advisory Board

  • Ǻslund, Anders, Institute of International Economics, Washington (USA)
  • Kolodko, Grzegorz, Kozminski University, Warsaw (Poland)
  • Mau, Vladimir, Academy of National Economy (Russia)
  • Messerlin, Patrick A, Groupe d’Economie Mondiale (France)
  • Saul Estrin, London School of Economics (UK)
  • Wagener, Hans-Jürgen, Europa Universität Viadrina (Germany)

Corvinus University of Budapest
Department of Economics
Fővám tér 8 Budapest, H-1093, Hungary
E-mail: vanyai.judit@krtk.hu  

Indexing and Abstracting Services:

  • CABELLS Journalytics
  • EconLit
  • Elsevier GEO Abstracts
  • GEOBASE
  • Index Copernicus
  • International Bibliographies IBZ and IBR
  • JEL
  • Referativnyi Zhurnal
  • RePEc
  • SCOPUS
  • Social Science Citation Index

 

2022  
Web of Science  
Total Cites
WoS
314
Journal Impact Factor 0.8
Rank by Impact Factor

Economics 334/380
TBA

Impact Factor
without
Journal Self Cites
0.6
5 Year
Impact Factor
0.8
Journal Citation Indicator 0.29
Rank by Journal Citation Indicator

Economics 421/581

 

Scimago  
Scimago
H-index
18
Scimago
Journal Rank
0.23
Scimago Quartile Score

Economics and Econometrics Q3

Scopus  
Scopus
Cite Score
1.1
Scopus
CIte Score Rank
Economics and Econometrics 521/705 (26th PCTL)
TBA
Scopus
SNIP
0.540

2021  
Web of Science  
Total Cites
WoS
285
Journal Impact Factor 0,939
Rank by Impact Factor Economics 326/379
Impact Factor
without
Journal Self Cites
0,646
5 Year
Impact Factor
0,740
Journal Citation Indicator 0,34
Rank by Journal Citation Indicator Economics 389/570
Scimago  
Scimago
H-index
15
Scimago
Journal Rank
0,285
Scimago Quartile Score Economics and Econometrics (Q3)
Scopus  
Scopus
Cite Score
1,4
Scopus
CIte Score Rank
Economics and Econometrics 436/696 (Q3)
Scopus
SNIP
0,507

2020  
Total Cites 275
WoS
Journal
Impact Factor
0,875
Rank by Economics 325/377 (Q4)
Impact Factor  
Impact Factor 0,534
without
Journal Self Cites
5 Year 0,500
Impact Factor
Journal  0,38
Citation Indicator  
Rank by Journal  Economics 347/549 (Q3)
Citation Indicator   
Citable 37
Items
Total 37
Articles
Total 0
Reviews
Scimago 13
H-index
Scimago 0,292
Journal Rank
Scimago Economics and Econometrics Q3
Quartile Score  
Scopus 225/166=1,4
Scite Score  
Scopus Economics and Econometrics 392/661 (Q3)
Scite Score Rank  
Scopus 0,668
SNIP  
Days from  289
submission  
to acceptance  
Days from  447
acceptance  
to publication  

2019  
Total Cites
WoS
212
Impact Factor 0,914
Impact Factor
without
Journal Self Cites
0,728
5 Year
Impact Factor
0,650
Immediacy
Index
0,156
Citable
Items
45
Total
Articles
45
Total
Reviews
0
Cited
Half-Life
3,9
Citing
Half-Life
9,5
Eigenfactor
Score
0,00015
Article Influence
Score
0,052
% Articles
in
Citable Items
100,00
Normalized
Eigenfactor
0,01891
Average
IF
Percentile
28,437
Scimago
H-index
12
Scimago
Journal Rank
0,439
Scopus
Scite Score
214/165=1,3
Scopus
Scite Score Rank
Economics and Econometrics 355/637 (Q3)
Scopus
SNIP
0,989

 

Acta Oeconomica
Publication Model Hybrid
Submission Fee none
Article Processing Charge 900 EUR/article
Printed Color Illustrations 40 EUR (or 10 000 HUF) + VAT / piece
Regional discounts on country of the funding agency World Bank Lower-middle-income economies: 50%
World Bank Low-income economies: 100%
Further Discounts Editorial Board / Advisory Board members: 50%
Corresponding authors, affiliated to an EISZ member institution subscribing to the journal package of Akadémiai Kiadó: 100%
Subscription fee 2023 Online subsscription: 620 EUR / 750 USD
Print + online subscription: 724 EUR / 880 USD
Subscription Information Online subscribers are entitled access to all back issues published by Akadémiai Kiadó for each title for the duration of the subscription, as well as Online First content for the subscribed content.
Purchase per Title Individual articles are sold on the displayed price.

Acta Oeconomica
Language English
Size B5
Year of
Foundation
1966
Volumes
per Year
1
Issues
per Year
4
Founder Magyar Tudományos Akadémia
Founder's
Address
H-1051 Budapest, Hungary, Széchenyi István tér 9.
Publisher Akadémiai Kiadó
Publisher's
Address
H-1117 Budapest, Hungary 1516 Budapest, PO Box 245.
Responsible
Publisher
Chief Executive Officer, Akadémiai Kiadó
ISSN 0001-6373 (Print)
ISSN 1588-2659 (Online)

Monthly Content Usage

Abstract Views Full Text Views PDF Downloads
Nov 2023 16 6 2
Dec 2023 52 1 0
Jan 2024 22 2 2
Feb 2024 31 4 0
Mar 2024 61 1 0
Apr 2024 23 0 0
May 2024 0 0 0